Keys To The Kingdom, Exegetical Perspective

Discussion in 'Bible Study' started by Xian Pugilist, Aug 22, 2012.

  1. The RCC makes heavy not of Peter being given keys to the kingdom. In a recent chat with a RCC friend (we are usually on the same side of most conversations but this one and Mary,) I gave him an argument that silenced him. We haven't talked since, but we will soon.

    So I wanted to share the observation and see what input, correction I would get.

    13 Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, He was asking His disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" 14 And they said, "Some say John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets." 15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" 16 Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 17 And Jesus said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven."

    1) He was talking to the disciples.
    2) He spoke to them again, but Peter, who often did, spoke for them.
    3) Their answer was, the messiah.
    4) Jesus patted him on the back and said upon this rock I will build my church.

    Who is the foundation the Church can't do without? Jesus being the Messiah? Or Peter and his nickname?

    The one you can't do without, is the rock the Church is built on.

    Who was Jesus talking to? The Disciples, not just the apostles, but all of 'em.

    So, who got the keys? The Disciples, or the Church, not the Peter.
  2. Jesus Christ, the Messiah, the Chief Cornerstone, holds the keys. Revelations 1:18
  3. Christ, the head of the Church, gave them to the Church at the founding of the Church to His disciples..> OR Jesus was giving away different keys.....

    So if the CHURCH holds the keys, then Christ does as well.... how's that for compromise?
  4. I can work with that.

    So, the Church holds the keys to the kingdom of heaven and Jesus holds the keys to death and hades.

    Which begs the next question: what are the "keys to the kingdom of heaven"?
  5. Xian maturity, teaching love, ephesians 4:11-18 is my first hunch.
  6. A key holder is one with the special privilege to open a locked door, by virtue of the fact that he's holding the key, right?

    My personal conviction is that it refers more broadly to GRACE and LAW.

    When the Church is teaching to abide by the righteous requirements of the law; the door is kept locked: the heart is "under arrest" bound to the burden of trying to uphold the law. Matthew 5:19

    When the Church is teaching grace; the door is wide open: the heart is free to roam in the fields of His forgiveness. Galatians 5:1

    Any thoughts?
  7. I think you are over thinking it.... first you have to decide if my thought on who the keys were given to is right, then figure how much of a metaphor it is and how it applies to the vss.... I can't tell you what it is, only what I think it is. I think it simply says, the church executes the will of the Christ. All of those rcc bashers will disagree. But this isn't the only reason I say this, tons of other scripture backs it up.
  8. By extension of my comment, and to clarify, I will say, yes, I agree that the keys of the kingdom were given to the Church. And, as the Church, they teach. And, what they teach will either "bind" by virtue of the law or "loosen" by virtue of grace. Thus, they hold the keys to the kingdom of God.
  9. The logic is there, that could be what it means. I dunno. Doesn't ring right to me, and I doubt anyone else will drop in. But, I think this might be taking the analogy too far with the keys. But neither way is conclusive. So.......
  10. You're probably right.
  11. There is no right, just speculation. I am not bashful, if I see a reasonable argument to conclude I will beat my head on the wall, call Dexter to study the blood splatter, examine my frustration and tell me my mood and stick to the study until I have worked and tried all angles I can come up with. Somewhere along the line my wrong thinking is exposed and I learn an angle I may have never heard and may never see. Or, I may draw no likely conclusion. When I start assuming an absolute where there isn't one, then I find I have to start bending, editing, redacting other verses to make the Bible fit together. That is a sure sign of failure. Epic fail.

    I spent 5 years on the tangents from Galatians 5:1. Why did a complex and somewhat elegant classic debater/politician, in the era where public speaking was being defined and the art standardized, say something as boneheaded stupid as, "it was for freedom he set us free". Seriously. It was for wet I got in the water. Just uncharacteristic. So what was the second freedom, hell, what is the first? There are more than one? All I was ever taught was you are freed from the penalty of your sins..... and this says somewhat different.

    This thought of yours, could be, could partially be, could not be how it is. I don't have the understanding of some key part of something to draw that conclusion.

    So, if asked point blank if it means..... if I don't have enough reason to say yes, I wont. If I say yes, most often I have more than a casual view at the topic, and I am not just parroting what I have heard that sounds right for my position like a good little lemming. You make a great logical position I have not considered. It doesn't ring right for me at this point, but that's my hunch, not a conclusive thought. So keep your thought, dig into it, corroborate it with other examples, and see if it stands. Make the argument to someone you KNOW will argue against you, just to see what the objections are, and THEN go make sure you have answers to them. If you do, move on, if you don't maybe you have to adjust your angle.

    How's that for a round about way of saying go figure it out yourself and get back to me? Hehehe
  12. :)

    I was conceding on "I doubt any one else will drop in" and "neither way is conclusive."

    I still don't think it's too much of a stretch to symbolize the way I have. But, that's obviously a matter of opinion and definitely not fact, so onward I press.... :)
  13. Ok, i totally missed the response tied to someone else dropping in. But I don't want anyone to take my thoughts and accept them without challenging them.....
    covered_by_grace likes this.
  14. Agreed!

Share This Page